7 ms·

This is a nonsensical comment. With the information we are given, there's hardly any basis to conclude anything about: 1. Who is betraying who 2. Who should t

by mmxiii 11y ago

This is a nonsensical comment. With the information we are given, there's hardly any basis to conclude anything about: 1. Who is betraying who 2. Who should take ownership of the startup in case of a breakup The OP is asking for any relevant experience and advice, not for someone to irrationally moralize.

crimsonalucard 11y ago
This is a nonsensical response ignoring the intrinsic relationship between morality and the information given. Since the situation is intrinsically related to morality. My advice is therefore also related to morality. Just because the OP doesn't specifically ask for a moral answer doesn't preclude me addressing morality. Betrayal and ownership are subjective in this context. However, there is still a majority consensus that can be arrived at based on the information given. Many will come to a single conclusion on who is the betrayer and who morally deserves ownership. When a person thoughtlessly steals his best friends girlfriend, what do you think the majority consensus will be?
- mmxiii 11y ago
  There are a few things getting conflated here. 1. What the OP should do. 2. What the majority consensus is 3. How you subjectively feel about the majority consensus. 4. How the OP subjectively feels about the majority consensus. In this case, there was not sufficient information given to really understand what the majority consensus is. Additionally, just because something is the consensus, doesn't mean it is necessarily the best course of action individually. Facing condemnation is a consequence, not physical law. The initial response took no time to give an appropriate course of action, and drew on your subjective heated feelings attached to your interpretation of the consensus.
  - crimsonalucard 11y ago
    >In this case, there was not sufficient information given to really understand what the majority consensus is. Additionally, just because something is the consensus, doesn't mean it is necessarily the best course of action individually. Facing condemnation is a consequence, not physical law. The initial response took no time to give an appropriate course of action, and drew on your subjective heated feelings attached to your interpretation of the consensus. There is no need to do a scientific analysis to derive majority consensus. Intuition is enough to know what the majority thinks about stealing your best friends girlfriend. Whether or not the majority consensus is the "best" course of action for the individual is not what I addressed. I specifically stated that my advice was from a moral standpoint, whether or not the OP considers that as "best" depends on whether or not he is a moral man. The initial response gave a appropriate course of action from a moral standpoint. It drew from a combination of sources all of which can be potentially described as subjective, moral, rational, emotional, heated yet still valid.
    - mmxiii 11y ago
      It's fine to use intuition, but it's extremely important to be able to reflect and recognize on its shortcomings, which is that you may be inadvertently layering your own subjectivity on what you think is objective. In this case your outburst is not valid. Is forcing yourself on another person immoral? Yes. Is intentionally manipulating someone's relationship for personal gain immoral? Yes. Are two people recognizing they would be happier together, and leaving a previous relationship immoral? That doesn't seem wrong. You are the one coloring this scenario as "stealing". There is no information here about who these people are, what their relationships are like. You are projecting onto this situation and constructing this strawman, and in turn moralizing about the strawman. That isn't reality.
      - crimsonalucard 11y ago
        It's fine to use intuition, but it's extremely important to be able to reflect and recognize on its shortcomings, which is that you may be inadvertently layering your own subjectivity on what you think is objective. In this case your outburst is not valid. All morality is subjective and thus so are my views. My views are still valid according to majority consensus DESPITE being subjective. Intuition has shortcomings but not when it comes to something obvious. >Is forcing yourself on another person immoral? Yes. Is intentionally manipulating someone's relationship for personal gain immoral? Yes. Are two people recognizing they would be happier together, and leaving a previous relationship immoral? That doesn't seem wrong. The last statement isn't immoral, while the first two are. However I am not addressing any of those things. What I am addressing is this: Allowing yourself to engage in a relationship with and/or develop feelings for your best friends, girlfriend. This is wrong under all counts. >You are the one coloring this scenario as "stealing". There is no information here about who these people are, what their relationships are like. You are projecting onto this situation and constructing this strawman, and in turn moralizing about the strawman. That isn't reality. Perhaps "stealing" is an inappropriate word as we are talking about things that are fundamentally impossible to steal. Betrayal is a better word and it is exactly the scenario the OP describes. If we asked said betrayed founder whether or not he thinks it's betrayal. His answer will be yes. Then if we ask the majority for consensus. The answer will be yes, again.

by mmxiii 11y ago

crimsonalucard 11y ago

This is a nonsensical response ignoring the intrinsic relationship between morality and the information given. Since the situation is intrinsically related to morality. My advice is therefore also related to morality. Just because the OP doesn't specifically ask for a moral answer doesn't preclude me addressing morality. Betrayal and ownership are subjective in this context. However, there is still a majority consensus that can be arrived at based on the information given. Many will come to a single conclusion on who is the betrayer and who morally deserves ownership. When a person thoughtlessly steals his best friends girlfriend, what do you think the majority consensus will be?

mmxiii 11y ago
There are a few things getting conflated here. 1. What the OP should do. 2. What the majority consensus is 3. How you subjectively feel about the majority consensus. 4. How the OP subjectively feels about the majority consensus. In this case, there was not sufficient information given to really understand what the majority consensus is. Additionally, just because something is the consensus, doesn't mean it is necessarily the best course of action individually. Facing condemnation is a consequence, not physical law. The initial response took no time to give an appropriate course of action, and drew on your subjective heated feelings attached to your interpretation of the consensus.
- crimsonalucard 11y ago
  >In this case, there was not sufficient information given to really understand what the majority consensus is. Additionally, just because something is the consensus, doesn't mean it is necessarily the best course of action individually. Facing condemnation is a consequence, not physical law. The initial response took no time to give an appropriate course of action, and drew on your subjective heated feelings attached to your interpretation of the consensus. There is no need to do a scientific analysis to derive majority consensus. Intuition is enough to know what the majority thinks about stealing your best friends girlfriend. Whether or not the majority consensus is the "best" course of action for the individual is not what I addressed. I specifically stated that my advice was from a moral standpoint, whether or not the OP considers that as "best" depends on whether or not he is a moral man. The initial response gave a appropriate course of action from a moral standpoint. It drew from a combination of sources all of which can be potentially described as subjective, moral, rational, emotional, heated yet still valid.
  - mmxiii 11y ago
    It's fine to use intuition, but it's extremely important to be able to reflect and recognize on its shortcomings, which is that you may be inadvertently layering your own subjectivity on what you think is objective. In this case your outburst is not valid. Is forcing yourself on another person immoral? Yes. Is intentionally manipulating someone's relationship for personal gain immoral? Yes. Are two people recognizing they would be happier together, and leaving a previous relationship immoral? That doesn't seem wrong. You are the one coloring this scenario as "stealing". There is no information here about who these people are, what their relationships are like. You are projecting onto this situation and constructing this strawman, and in turn moralizing about the strawman. That isn't reality.
    - crimsonalucard 11y ago
      It's fine to use intuition, but it's extremely important to be able to reflect and recognize on its shortcomings, which is that you may be inadvertently layering your own subjectivity on what you think is objective. In this case your outburst is not valid. All morality is subjective and thus so are my views. My views are still valid according to majority consensus DESPITE being subjective. Intuition has shortcomings but not when it comes to something obvious. >Is forcing yourself on another person immoral? Yes. Is intentionally manipulating someone's relationship for personal gain immoral? Yes. Are two people recognizing they would be happier together, and leaving a previous relationship immoral? That doesn't seem wrong. The last statement isn't immoral, while the first two are. However I am not addressing any of those things. What I am addressing is this: Allowing yourself to engage in a relationship with and/or develop feelings for your best friends, girlfriend. This is wrong under all counts. >You are the one coloring this scenario as "stealing". There is no information here about who these people are, what their relationships are like. You are projecting onto this situation and constructing this strawman, and in turn moralizing about the strawman. That isn't reality. Perhaps "stealing" is an inappropriate word as we are talking about things that are fundamentally impossible to steal. Betrayal is a better word and it is exactly the scenario the OP describes. If we asked said betrayed founder whether or not he thinks it's betrayal. His answer will be yes. Then if we ask the majority for consensus. The answer will be yes, again.